ADOPTION/DIFFUSION RESEARCH

Note: The following work plan replaces that in the Eighth Work Plan in full.

Introduction
The purpose of this research is to identify the characteristics and farm situations of aquaculture producers who are actual or potential adopters of PD/A CRSP technologies. If PD/A CRSP technologies and research findings are to have impacts at the farm level, it is important to understand the constraints and interests of producers who comprise the target audience for the project. Advances in basic understanding of the pond environment and cultural practices must eventually be translated and diffused to hatcheries, fish farmers, and other agencies and organizations involved in aquaculture development.

Documenting the central mechanisms of transaction between fish farmers and the knowledge system in aquaculture is a fundamental objective of this work. Subsequent studies will address these issues at new sites, expand the scope of, and clarify socioeconomic dimensions as they affect the conduct and progress of the overall research program through the efforts of individual scientists and their host institutions.

The research has been crosscutting in a number of ways. The studies conducted to date reflect a series of parallel studies conducted at four PD/A CRSP sites. The farm-level surveys have applied a common core survey instrument to small samples of fish farmers while including a significant component of site-specific questions and adaptations. The country-specific questions are designed to augment the outreach and research problem selection processes undertaken by each project.

Objectives
Study 1. Describe the practices, technical proficiency, and receptivity to the adoption of CRSP technologies and production regimes among practicing fish farmers.
Study 2. Develop baseline information for technology development transfer efforts in Peru.
Study 3. Obtain basic production, marketing, labor, input supply, and farming system information from potential adopters of CRSP-related technologies that might be incorporated in expert systems that rely on comprehensive socio-bio-economic models of pond aquaculture.


Significance
The socioeconomic program of the PD/A CRSP relates to the research priorities and constraints described in the Continuation Plan in the following ways. These studies elucidate barriers to assimilation of technological innovations through extension and training. They identify ways to circumvent or overcome such barriers. Some impediments reflect gender-related social patterns and differential access to information and technology. Others pertain to inadequate farm-level incentives and little-understood constraints to intensification of aquacultural activities.

The limits of local markets, real or perceived production risks, and village-level organizational problems may inhibit participation in aquacultural development. An overall climate of food insecurity may undermine efforts to introduce new enterprises such as aquaculture (Williams 1998). Socioeconomic research undertaken through the PD/A CRSP will address these and other important aspects of interface between the research program and the rural sector.

Methods
Study 1. The productive use of natural resources is fundamental to sustaining rural people's livelihoods in developing countries (Hall 1997). Along the river Amazon, freshwater fish provide up to 90 percent of animal protein and prove a major source of employment and income for the rural population (Hall 1997). The introduction, dissemination, and technical augmentation of Colossoma culture in the Peruvian Amazon by the PD/A CRSP is a significant objective.1 For indigenous and peasant populations who depend almost entirely upon farming, fishing, and various forms of extractivism for their sustenance, aquaculture can be a significant source of nutrition, income, and food security (Coomes 1995).

This study will provide baseline data comparable to that obtained at other PD/A CRSP sites. An initial version of an integrated framework for considering socioeconomic factors affecting the implementation and sustained pursuit of pond aquaculture has been developed (Molnar et al. 1996). This study will extend the initial research approach and socioeconomic framework to the new CRSP location near Iquitos, Peru.2 A common survey instrument was employed at the Honduras, Thailand, Philippine, and Kenya research sites. However, due to the quite different riverine transport and ethnic context of the Peru site3, participatory research strategies will be employed in advance of structured data collection.

In the first of two planned visits to the Peru site, a collaborating social scientist will be identified and an initial set of village visits and group interviews will be conducted. Veldhuizen et al. (1997) and others have identified a series of approaches that can be used to identify constraints and possibilities for agricultural development in partnership with area farmers. Participatory technology development is a process of purposeful and creative interaction between fish farmers and technology developers (Townsley 1996). Through this interaction, the partners endeavor to increase their understanding of the main constraints and dynamics of the local farming systems, to define priority problems and opportunities, and to experiment with possible options for improvement. The options are based on ideas and experiences derived from both indigenous knowledge and formal science.

During the researcher's first visit, 6-9 group interviews with gamitana (Colossoma macropomum) farmers will be held at a representative set of target villages. A matrix sampling approach will be used to identify a series of villages or open country settlement areas that represent the different types of ethnic and socioeconomic groups found in the target region. The group interviews will be conducted in Spanish or local language as appropriate through a translator. Data from these interviews, field notes, and interviews with Peruvian scientists and other knowledgeables will be synthesized in a report outlining the needs, interests, and capacities of colossoma farmers relative to the conduct of PD/A CRSP research.

Although a different culture species is employed in Peru, many of the same questions and issues connected to the conduct of aquaculture in a complex farming system continue to apply. The instrument and approach will be adapted to reflect the niche occupied by Colossoma in the Peruvian Amazon agricultural system. Molnar will collaborate with Gonzalo Llosa and others to identify sites, interviewers, and country-specific research issues.

Colossoma is an extremely important food fish for people along the Amazon. The seasonal nature of the catch creates a long period in which demand for this fish is not met. The fish itself is said to have a "delightful, fruity taste" putting it in demand across South America. Fortunately, the fish's vegetarianism and quick growth lend itself to fish farming, which Belville (1996) argues may well prove extremely productive in the near future.
Belville (1996) provides a summary of the species, its natural history, and connections to fish farming. Colossoma macropomum has the common name gamitana in Peru, but is also known as tambaqui in other locales. It lives in the Orinoco and Amazon River basins in South America. The colossoma is the largest characin in the Amazon (Goulding 1980).

The colossoma, like many forest fishes of the Amazon, is currently being threatened by two factors. Excessive commercial fishing, which favors big fish like colossoma, is taking its toll on populations. The fish has nearly been fished out of the waters around Manaus, Brazil, where the Rio Negro and Amazon converge. Additionally, forest floodplains are being cleared to create rice paddies and cattle pastures, eradicating food sources for the fishes. The imminent collapse of the Amazon fish industry will have dire consequences for the local human populations, which largely depend on the fish for their dietary protein.

The extension of CRSP research efforts to Peru represents the opportunity to develop baseline information about the technology needs and production niches for colossoma farmers. Most of the inhabitants of the targeted Amazonian villages carry their products by canoes. Marketing, fingerling transport, and other issues pertaining to the post-subsistence practice of aquaculture have not been well established. For example, many villages have only recently obtained a peque - peque motor to propel wood boats to carry their products and to go to the more developed towns.

The Selva, which includes the humid tropics of the Amazon jungle and rivers, covers about 63 percent of Peru but contains only about 11 percent of the country's population. A number of torrential rivers unite as they flow, forming the Amazon before reaching the burgeoning city of Iquitos. Human settlements in the Amazonian region are invariably riverine, clustering at the edges of the hundreds of rivers and oxbow lakes that in natural conditions are virtual fish farms in terms of their productivity (Hudson 1995).

The streams and rivers constitute a serpentine network of pathways plied by boats and canoes that provide the basic transport through the forest. Here, the Shipibo, Asháninka (Campa), Aguaruna, and other tribes lived in relative independence from the Peruvian state until the mid-twentieth century. In the past few decades, more and more mestizos—people of mixed indigenous and European ancestry—have moved to the Amazon. They were having trouble finding work in their hometowns and saw opportunity in the Amazon. Many went looking for agricultural land. Others took jobs in oil fields or other industries.

Compared to upland areas, the population living in the Selva is engaged in a quite different set of agroecological patterns of activity. The native peoples, living in riverine settings for the greater part, depend on fishing, hunting, and selective gathering from the forest. They also engage in highly effective horticulture, usually in a system known as slash and burn. Another common horticultural system employed along the riverbanks in the dry season takes advantage of extensive silt deposits left by the seasonal floods. On such open plots, farmers tend to monocrop or, at least, to reduce the number of varieties sown (Hudson 1995).

The information obtained in this study may help guide the selection of research strategies and types of technologies to be developed by CRSP research. Information detailing farmer perceptions of production and marketing strategies should be useful for shaping the problems addressed in research trials and the formulation of realistic prescriptions for farm level practice. The results of this study will be available in December 1998 in the form of a manuscript examining the composition of the target population for fish culture in the Iquitos area and the implications for the conduct of applied research and outreach activities.

Study 2. In a subsequent visit to the Iquitos research site, a structured data collection strategy will be implemented. The tilapia survey instrument employed at previous PD/A CRSP sites will be adapted for the conditions, constraints, and interests of colossoma farmers in the Peruvian Amazon. Approximately 30 structured interviews will be conducted in Spanish with a representative sample of practicing fish farmers. This study will be initiated in January 1999. These data will complement and extend the initial qualitative data. A formal report will be issued synthesizing the qualitative and quantitative information in an assessment of the prospects and potentials for colossoma research and related development activities conducted by the Peru PD/A CRSP in October 1999.
The socioeconomic research program has developed a standardized profile of aquaculture practices, profitability measures, community characteristics, and producer orientations in four CRSP countries. The second phase of work at the Peru site will conduct a parallel survey of practicing fish farmers. This study will utilize students to conduct interviews, analyze data, and address project objectives. If possible, a graduate student from Peru will be recruited to conduct this phase of the analysis.

The results of this study will be available in December 1999 in the form of a report profiling the composition and orientation of the target population for fish culture in the Iquitos area and the implications for the conduct of applied research and outreach activities. The thesis and reports completed by these students will contribute to the CRSP project and develop the socioeconomic analytical abilities of students who will later undertake planning and management positions in their home countries.

Study 3. Build upon previous research and analysis of socioeconomic issues linked to aquacultural development, indicators of project impact and feasibility will be developed. Given the modeling and experimentation needs of other PD/A project activities, consultation and analysis of socioeconomic issues will be provided (McTaggart 1997). Lightfoot et al. (1992) outline a set of participatory methods that might be used to broaden their view of the farm system from a collection of enterprises on privately owned land to relationships among resource systems, some of which may well be common property. Specific attention will be paid to the situations in CRSP site countries as contexts for receiving CRSP technologies. This study is intended to provide data and consultation to other PD/A CRSP projects that seek to complement physical and biological data with socioeconomic parameters in models of production systems and decision

For example, Honduras may be a site of these studies. Pending the availability of funding, research will focus on Yoro, a department in the north central portion of the country. This activity will initially involve identification of farmer objectives under small-scale and commercial conditions. For the small-scale farmer, food security means calorific and protein requirements as well as resource use optimization. However, for commercial farming economic optimization is often assumed to be the main objective (Green 1997). The central outcome of this work will be a clarified understanding of the goals and priorities of Honduran farmers in small-scale and commercial farming systems. Land tenure, concentrated land holding, and food security are central issues in the rural sector in Honduras (Stonich 1991).

Field methods to employed at these sites will include intensive interviews with knowledgeable informants, focus group interviews with representative groups of practicing fish farmers, complemented by a series of interviews with knowledgeable informants. Thus Study 3 continues and extends an established approach for documenting socioeconomic impact and diagnosing conditions impeding the utilization of CRSP research results in the field. Visits to field sites and group interviews with commercial and small-scale farmers will take place as new sites or project activities generate a need for social science input.

Timetable
Study 1. Start of Research: September 1998
Technical Report: December 1998
Study 2. Start of Research: January 1999
Technical Report: October 1999
Study 3. Start of Research: September 1999
Technical Report: March 2000

Interdisciplinary Linkages
Cooperation across disciplinary boundaries is difficult enough, but the issue is not just one of philosophical recognition of the need for social science input, but also one of resource allocation. Social science researchers must have some continuity of relationship to CRSP scientists and researchers in order to learn the disciplinary subculture and provide sustained analyses to the project as it evolves.

Important questions pertain to the technologies and production regimes emerging from CRSP aquaculture research that can actually be implemented on farms in developing countries. Much of the baseline data commonly found in other agricultural sciences has been lacking in aquaculture. The CRSP has identified many of the needed parameters that apply across diverse environments. It is not clear how or to what extent the research findings are reaching institutions serving farmers in CRSP countries and whether they in turn are extending the findings to farmers.

There is a need to clarify the correspondence between the CRSP paradigm, farmer perspectives, and actual farming system potentials. It has not been established whether the assumed inputs are available, at what cost, and if farmers think that the production regimes fit their farming systems. It is well understood that economic returns are only one of an array of forces that shape farmer decisions about technology. Thus the orientation of the CRSP social science research program is to complement and extend the biological, technology-development program of the CRSP.

Expected Impact
The results of this research are expected to clarify mechanisms by which CRSP research is and can be disseminated. The research can be expected to establish principles for enhancing the transfer of CRSP technology to industry and farmers; it also can be expected to affect the choice of research strategy and problem selection clarifying the farm-level implications of various technologies and production strategies. Thus, the expected impact is dual--on the planning and conduct of the CRSP effort overall, as well on the diffusion and implementation of CRSP research findings in the field.

The project will provide baseline data for the new CRSP sites in a way that will allow the documentation of quantitative and qualitative impacts of aquacultural research on the institutional and farm levels. Gender is a central social variable in the analysis of developmental impacts; the research design will make provision for the gender-separate analysis of human capital impacts. In particular, we will examine the training needs and impacts of the CRSP as they pertain to men and women in host country institutions. Similarly we will endeavor to portray differential farm- and household-level impacts as they are differentially realized among men and women.

In Peru, the research will provide baseline data about the practice of aquaculture, the availability of inputs, and the structure of incentives and constraints that shape farm-level decision making. Understanding the role of fish culture in the household and the local economy is crucial for developing appropriate technology and selecting effective mechanisms for technology transfer.

Similarly, the proposed study will provide detailed information about the level of aquaculture practice in other CRSP sites not yet included in the study. It may feature return visits to accomplish field studies address emergent social and institutional issues identified collaboratively with CRSP personnel. It also will develop better specification of the role of fish culture in the household and farming system, particularly those segments most likely to need and implement CRSP technologies.

Relationship to CRSP Goals and Global Experiment
Basic information about fish farmers, their households, and their farming systems is usually nonexistent. Institutions often proceed on the basis of established practice or conventional wisdom that may neglect the circumstances of women and small-scale operators. Systematic information about the conditions, circumstances, and problems experienced by farmers provides basic knowledge for planning and guiding a research program. The perceptions and interests of representative samples of farm operators can be useful for informing the direction and strategy of technology development.

Surveys provide statistical estimates of target population parameters. Survey and other quantitative data provides the numerical documentation often required by the evaluation system in USAID. Surveys can be efficient ways of collecting and aggregating information about the characteristics of individual farmers or individual farm units, information that is necessary to project planning as well as to some aspects of later project evaluation. Surveys and field studies may be necessary components of efforts to design on-farm trials that may facilitate the development and diffusion of technology (Veverica and Molnar 1998).

Survey data, however, is not as effective in revealing the interaction effects, the combination of circumstances that lead to the extremes of success or failure. There is a need to supplement socioeconomic surveys with field studies devoted to specific topics or issues pertinent to the stage of the project or situation at hand. Qualitative information emanating from trip reports and field studies provides the motivational understanding for success and failure on the ground.
Field studies may be commissioned when a problem is perceived or experienced in terms of widespread de-adoption or conflicts among fish farmers or between fish farmers and other groups. Other issues may emerge from more routine field work objectives that lead to discoveries of certain patterns, problems, or circumstances that would have been otherwise overlooked or ignored to the eventual detriment of the CRSP in that locale. Verbatim quotations from fish farmer beneficiaries/ participants are often critical aspects of an argument conveying the worth and utility of a program.

Field studies can provide insight and human meaning to complement statistical fact. Field studies, involving such techniques as participant observation and the use of informants can be useful means for discovering patterns of perception, behavior, and organization that would not be readily revealed in surveys (Harrison 1995). Field studies involve intensive interviewing, observation, and immersion in the situations confronting farmers and researchers. Field studies can constructively focus on specific themes, accumulate important data, and then articulate valid insights that further project objectives and enhance the impacts of fish culture on villages, farm families, and the rural poor (ALCOM 1990).

The proposed project examines issues integrally related to the design and conduct of the Global Experiment. The first objective will clarify the mechanisms of technology transfer associated with the normal conduct of CRSP activities that have often been taken for granted or underutilized. Additional socioeconomic studies in additional CRSP locales will contribute to a comprehensive perspective on the findings and technology associated with the Global Experiment, its utilization by farmers and institutional systems, and its impacts on individual, family, and community well-being (Coughenour 1992, Veverica and Molnar 1997).

The institutional impacts of CRSP technologies are often uneven because the process depends on the organizational location of the researcher, her language capabilities, and varying levels of personal motivation and ability to spend non research time with farmers, hatchery operators, and industry representatives. The consulting practices of CRSP researchers may enhance the influence of CRSP technologies on national industries, but also may increase the inequities distancing small farmers from large-scale agribusiness (Harrison 1997). Researchers are sometimes faced with ethical dilemmas connected to the known efficacy of large-scale industrial enterprises in implementing new technology vis-a-vis the isolation, fragmentation, and caution of the small-scale sector (Edwards 1994).

Leaving the diffusion process entirely to the vagaries of the market may not accomplish the poverty alleviation and income improvement associated with USAID funding. Social science research may discover indigenous mechanisms for conveying technology, particularly to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and other organized entities that can retail technology to small farmers, women, and other hard-to-reach categories of fish culturists. The information channels that actually reach farmers can then be utilized in a realistic manner to convey practical information about the prospects for fish culture (Rogers 1983, Roling 1989).

We would endeavor to promote and disseminate the results of the study in manifold formal and informal ways. Within the CRSP itself, socioeconomic research is disseminated through presentations and discussions at the Annual Meeting. These are central mechanisms for getting the study results to the scientists, but email and the PD/A CRSP newsletter also are vital forums. Externally, the results are conveyed through disciplinary publications and serials devoted to development issues.

US Institutional Support
The International Center for Aquaculture and Aquatic Environments has extensive experience in conducting overseas aquaculture development projects. The knowledge of aquaculture technology, host country institutions, and personnel will be a valuable asset in the conduct of the proposed research.

Linkages and Collaborative Activity
This project will build on established relationships with CRSP researchers around the world. Auburn University and staff members at the University of Southern Illinois at Carbondale have established email and fax communication ties that will facilitate the conduct of the overall project. We will work closely with CRSP personnel and host country collaborators around the globe to implement the research activities associated with the first objective.
The benefits of regular participation of social scientists in the CRSP program stem from the trip reports, research articles, and other publications that emanate from the project. These documents can be called on to guide a new effort, elucidate a conflict or issue, help shape a decision about the direction or technology development, and contribute to the continued justification and support of the research program.

The development of technology appropriate to the circumstances and environments of developing country farmers is a critical issue facing researchers around the globe. Sociological research identifying the mechanisms and channels facilitating the transfer and implementation of aquacultural technology in various locales may generate insights shortening the period between initiation and application of research results in some developing countries (Tendler 1993, Huisman 1990).

Although the consequences of CRSP research may be most centrally articulate, through accounts of technologies identified, publications accomplished, and patents received, effects on people are what justify continued support. The humanistic imperative to help others help themselves remains a fundamental motivation and justification for the CRSP. Social science research sustains a longitudinal base of information about the progress of the CRSP and can provide testimony and defense of CRSP activity. Gender issues and the differential impacts of project extension and training activities on women and men are fundamental considerations for social science research (Engle 1987, Engle et al. 1997).

The dialogue about project direction, issues, and agenda is informed by an interested participant with a comparative perspective on the impacts, consequences, and meaning of fish culture in developing countries. This relationship in turn informs the social scientist's apprehension of technical problems in the field and in the laboratory, increasing the relevance of the social science research that is conducted and communicated (Cernea 1991a, 1991b).

The many institutional actors working in aquaculture perhaps should be considered the primary audience for a global research project such as the PD/A CRSP. Some level of direct farmer contact and training is necessary for keeping PD/A CRSP scientists in touch with the direct experiences and problems of fish farmers. Nevertheless, the impacts and influence of the PD/A CRSP may be greater if institutions and industry are understood to be the primary consumers of PD/A CRSP outcomes.

Thus, seminars for NGOs that maintain extensive and long-term relationships with villages and small-scale farmers may be the most important mechanism for reaching this constituency than direct intervention by the PD/A CRSP. As long as small- and medium-scale farmers remains a central target segment for PD/A CRSP research impacts, the development of a continuing network of contacts with representatives of these groups will be a significant objective for the PD/A CRSP. The NGOs may be more effective at stimulating interest and reaching small-scale farmers than governmental organizations or the limited and sporadic activities of PD/A CRSP personnel (Kaimowitz 1993). These and other means may be used for wholesaling PD/A CRSP technology to actors closer to village life who will be there when PD/A CRSP is not.

References
ALCOM (Aquaculture for Local Community Development Programme). 1990. Methods to promote aquaculture in rural development workshop. FAO Report GCP/INT/436/SWE/REP/5. Harare, Zimbabwe.

Belville, Roy G. 1996. Fish Capsule Report for Biology of Fishes. Web page. University of Michigan, Department of Biology, Ann Arbor, Michigan. http://www.umich.edu/~bio440/fishcapsules96/Colossoma.html

Cernea, M. 1991a. Putting people first: sociological variables in rural development. The World Bank, Washington, DC.

Cernea, M.M. 1991b. Using knowledge from social science in development projects. Discussion Paper Number 114. The World Bank, Washington, DC.

Chibnik, Michael. 1994. Risky rivers: the economics and politics of floodplain farming in Amazonia. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Coomes, O. 1995. A century of rain forest use in Western Amazonia: lessons for extraction-based conservation of tropical forest resources. Forest and Conservation History 39: 108-20.

Coughenour, C.M. 1992. A new agenda for CRSP social science research. In:
C.M. Coughenour (Editor). Proceedings of the Workshop on Social Science Research and the CRSPs. Unnumbered Report. Department of Rural Sociology, University of Kentucky, Lexington

Edwards, P. 1994. Partners in development: the promotion of sustainable aquaculture. AIT Aquaculture, Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok.

Engle, C.R. 1987. Women in training and extension services in aquaculture. In:
E.E. Nash, C. R. Engle, and D. Crosetti, (Editors). Women in Aquaculture. ADCP/REP/87/28. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome, pp. 67-82.

Engle, C.R., R. Balakrishnan, T.R. Hanson, and J. Molnar. 1997. Economic considerations and social factors in aquaculture. In: Hillary S. Egna and Claude E. Boyd (Editors) Dynamics of Pond Aquaculture. CRC Press, New York, pp. 377-395

Goulding, Michael. 1980. The Fishes and the Forest: Explorations in Amazonian Natural History. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Green, Bartholomew W. 1997. Development of semi-intensive aquaculture technologies in Honduras. Summary of freshwater aquacultural research conducted from 1983 to 1992. Research and Development series no. 39. Auburn University, Auburn, AL.

Hall, A. 1997. Sustaining Amazonia: Grassroots Action for Productive Conservation. Manchester University Press, Manchester, UK and New York, NY.

Harrison, E. 1995. My pond has no fish: aquaculture development in Luapula Province, Zambia. Unnumbered Report. University of Sussex, School of African and Asian Studies, Brighton, England.

Harrison, E. 1997. Options for small-scale aquaculture development. In: Manuel Martinez-Espinosa (Editor) Expert consultation on small-scale rural aquaculture. FAO Fisheries Report No. 548. FIRA/R548. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.

Hudson, Rex A. 1995. Peru: a country study. Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.

Huisman, E.A. 1990. Aquacultural research as a tool in international assistance. Ambio 19:400-403.

Kaimowitz, D. 1993. The role of nongovernmental organizations in agricultural research and technology transfer in Latin America. World Development 21:1139-1150.

Lightfoot, C., S. Feldman and M. Zainul Abedin. 1991. Households, agroecosystems and rural resources management: a guidebook for broadening the concepts of gender and farming systems. ICLARM, Manila, The Philippines.

McTaggart, Robin, editor. 1997. Participatory action research: international contexts and consequences. State University of New York Press, Albany.

Merrill, Tim L. (Editor) 1995. Honduras: a country study. Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.

Moehl, J. and J. Molnar. 1995. Dilemmas of aquacultural development in Rwanda. In: C. Bailey, S. Jentoff, and P. Sinclair (Editors). Social and Environmental Aspects of Aquacultural Development. Boulder: Westview Press, chapter 13.

Molnar, J.J. and B.L. Duncan. 1989. Monitoring and evaluating aquaculture projects. In: R.B. Pollnac (Editor). Monitoring and Evaluating the Impacts of Small-Scale Fishery Projects. International Center for Marine Resource Development, Kingston, Rhode Island, pp. 28-40.

Molnar, J.J., B.L. Duncan, and U. Hatch. 1987. Fish in the farming system: the FSR approach to aquacultural development. In: H. Schwarzweller (Editor). Research in Rural Sociology and Rural Development. JAI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut, pp. 169-193.

Molnar, J.J., N.B. Schwartz, and L.L. Lovshin. 1985. Integrated aquacultural development: sociological issues in the cooperative management of community fish ponds. Sociological Ruralis XXV: 61-80.

Molnar, J.J., T.R. Hanson, and L.L. Lovshin. 1996. Social, economic, and institutional dimensions of aquacultural research: the pond dynamics/aquaculture CRSP in Rwanda, Honduras, and the Philippines. and Thailand. Research and Development Series No. 38. Auburn University, Alabama: International Center for Aquaculture and Aquatic Environments.

Molnar, J.J., V. Adjavon, and A. Rubagumya. 1991. The sustainability of aquaculture as a farm enterprise in Rwanda. Journal of Applied Aquaculture (1) 2:37-62.

Molnar, J., C. Cox, A. Rubagumya, and P. Nyirahabimana. 1993. Socioeconomic factors affecting the transfer and sustainability of aquaculture technology in Rwanda. Research and Development Series 35. Auburn University, Alabama. International Center for Aquaculture and Aquatic Environments.

Rogers, E. 1983. Diffusion of innovations. The Free Press, New York.

Roling, N. 1989. Extension science: information systems in agricultural development. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

Smith, Gavin A. 1989. Livelihood and resistance: peasants and the politics of land in Peru. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Stonich, S. 1991. Food Security in Southern Honduras. Pp. 45-74 in: Whitehead, S. and Ferguson, A.E. (Editors), Harvest of want: Hunger and food security in Central America and Mexico. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.

Tendler, J. 1993. Tales of dissemination in small-farm agriculture: lessons for institution builders. World Development 21:1567-1582.

Townsley, P. 1996. Rapid appraisal, participatory rural appraisal, and aquaculture. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 358. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.

Veldhuizen, Laurens van, A. Waters-Bayer, and H. de Zeeuw. 1997. Developing technology with farmers: a trainer's guide. Zed Books, London and New York.

Veverica, K.L. and J. Molnar. 1997. Developing and extending aquaculture technology for producers. In: Hillary S. Egna and Claude E. Boyd (Editors) Dynamics of Pond Aquaculture. CRC Press, New York, pp. 397-414

Veverica, K.L. and J. Molnar. 1998. On-farm research in Rwanda. In: Brigitte Goetze, Deborah Burke, and John Baker (Editors), Lessons Learned from On-Farm Trials: The PD/A CRSP Experience. Pond Dynamics/ Aquaculture CRSP, Office of International Programs, Oregon State University, Corvallis, pp.79-81.

Williams, M. 1998. The Transition in the Contribution of Living Aquatic Resources to Food Security. Food, Agriculture, and the Environment Discussion Paper 13. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC.

Notes
1) Adult colossoma can reach sizes of 1 m and 30 kg. Colossoma live in the turbid waterways and tributaries of the Amazon and Orinoco river basins. The species generally stays in deeper waters, rarely being encountered in shallow zones. Juveniles are omnivorous, eating fruits, seeds, and zooplankton. The immature colossoma can filter zooplankton through special gills containing long, fine gillrakers. Adults are exclusively frugivorous. Colossoma have huge teeth, but they are not predatory fish. They use their big, broad molars and strong jaws to grind and crush seeds Adult colossoma feed primarily on fruits and seeds when the rivers flood. The fishes focus on a few select species of plants during the wet season, most of which are abundant and widely dispersed. Common foods include the seeds of the rubber tree and the palm tree fruit. The colossoma apparently waits under the source plant to catch falling fruits and seeds at the water surface. Colossoma, along with the many species of fishes in the Amazon, access a huge but temporary amount of food with the seasonal floods. When the waters rise along the Amazon, the forests can be inundated with waters of depths over 10 meters. The colossoma, with its strong teeth, grind up and destroy many seeds—but enough seeds survive to make Colossoma macropomum a possible dispersal agent. The floods last up to 6 months or more, during which the colossoma lays down a huge reserve of fat to sustain itself during the coming low-water period. (Melville).

2) In the rainforest surrounding Iquitos there is neither a rainy nor dry season as in most tropical areas. There are only two "seasons": from approximately December-May is "high water" season (due to melting snow from the mountains during their summer and from the rainy season in the upper jungle; and from approximately June-November is "low water" season. While the water level can change more than 45 feet, the climate, warm and humid, is relatively constant throughout the year. Normal daytime highs are 88 degrees F and nighttime lows are 72 degrees F. There is no difference in temperature during the high and low water seasons. It rains between 200-250 days during the year, usually a good hard rain of short duration, but occurring at any hour of the day and at any time of the year.

3) Unofficial estimates: Native American, 45 percent; mestizo (mixed Native American and European ancestry), 37 percent; white, 15 percent; black, Asian, and other, 3 percent. Other estimates put Native Americans as high as 52.5 percent (Quechua, 47.1 percent; Aymara, 5.4 percent).